Two crew members were injured Monday after a Porter flight from Ottawa had to evade what may have been a drone as it landed at Toronto’s Billy Bishop Airport.

Transportation Safety Board of Canada spokeswoman Julie Leroux said Porter flight 204 was about 30 nautical miles from the airport when it encountered what may have been an unmanned aerial vehicle at about 9,000 feet on its approach to landing at 7:30 a.m.

“The flight crew performed an evasive manoeuvre,” said Leroux.

In an emailed statement, Porter Airlines said there was no contact between the airplane and the object.

According to the airline, the pilots initially thought the object looked like a balloon. Upon later review, they believed the object might have been a drone.

Porter said the plane was over Lake Ontario near Pickering when the pilots noticed an object in the distance.

“As they approached the object, they realized it was very close to their flight path and decided to take appropriate evasive action,” said the statement from the airline.

Porter said two flight attendants sustained minor injuries and were taken to hospital and released. Porter said there were 54 passengers aboard the plane, but no reported passenger injuries.

The TSB is sending a team of investigators to look into what they described as a “risk of collision.”

The plane is still in Toronto, Leroux said. TSB investigators are expected to interview the crew Monday.

OTTAWA – The Liberal government is looking to add U.S. customs preclearance to the Toronto Island and Quebec City airports, a move that would open up more direct flights and destinations for travellers heading to the United States.

Transport Minister Marc Garneau will be in Washington on Tuesday to meet U.S. transport and homeland security secretaries to discuss adding Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport and Quebec City’s Jean Lesage airport to a list of eight current Canadian airports where passengers are precleared for flights to the U.S.

Adding preclearance to the Toronto Island and Quebec City airports (which have made the request to the Canadian government) would allow airlines flying out of those two locations to offer direct service to a greater number of U.S. destinations because they could fly into airports that don’t have customs officials.

It would also potentially attract more U.S. tourists to Canada because American travellers could hop on more direct flights back to the United States.

There are a huge number of airports in the United States that don’t have customs people

“Essentially you could land anywhere in the United States at an airport, whether or not it has customs officials. And there are a huge number of airports in the United States that don’t have customs people,” Garneau said in an interview.

“There’s a great potential for airports in terms of acquiring new flight destinations and building up their capability.”

The United States currently conducts preclearance operations at eight international airports in Canada under an air transport agreement concluded in 2001: Ottawa, Toronto Pearson, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Halifax, Montreal and Winnipeg.

Each year, approximately 11 million passengers are precleared for flights to the U.S. out of the eight Canadian airports currently included in the agreement.

Adding the two airports would be a particular boon to residents in Toronto and Quebec City, as well as to Porter Airlines, which flies out of Billy Bishop airport to multiple U.S. destinations.

For example, without customs preclearance at the Toronto Island airport, Porter is unable to offer direct flights to the more central Reagan National Airport in Washington (which doesn’t have customs screening for passenger traffic), and is instead forced to fly from Toronto to Dulles International Airport, which is much further from D.C.’s core.

The preclearance allows U.S.-bound passengers to get advance approval to enter the United States from various Canadian locations, and they don’t have to clear customs upon arrival. U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers stationed in Canada screen passengers and their bags, and make decisions on who and what is allowed into the United States.

The customs preclearance reduces wait times for passengers and can reduce the number of connections required. The broader goal is to expedite the flow of trade and travel, while improving border security.

“The United States puts a high priority on security at the border, whether it’s the movement of goods or the movement of people,” Garneau added.

Each day, around 400,000 people and $2 billion worth of goods and services cross the Canada-U.S. border.

Garneau will meet Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx to discuss a comprehensive preclearance agreement signed in March 2015 by the Obama administration and the former Conservative government. Garneau and Foxx will also discuss harmonizing transportation regulations.

The new pact updates the existing air agreement and would allow, for the first time, the possibility of conducting preclearance operations for land, rail and marine transport of people and goods.

For rail, passengers and their luggage could be precleared in Canada before leaving the train station, meaning they wouldn’t need to be stopped at the Canada-U.S. border. In February 2014, the two countries launched a truck cargo preinspection pilot project at the Peace Bridge in Fort Erie, Ont.

The agreement still requires enabling legislation in both countries to take effect. Garneau said the Liberal government is still examining the agreement and wants to see if the U.S. is proposing any changes to the deal signed last year. However, the decision to allow U.S. customs preclearance at Canadian airports and other locations is very much up to the U.S. government.

Once the new agreement is formalized, the Toronto Island and Quebec City airports could present a business case to Transport Canada, and the Canadian government could then make an official request to the U.S. to authorize the customs preclearance, the minister said.

Garneau supports the preclearance operations and expanding it to the Billy Bishop and Jean Lesage airports, and believes the initiative could eventually extend to other Canadian airports.

“I think there are other airports that could suddenly decide ‘Yeah, they’d like to have that capability as well,’ ” he said.

The agreement is reciprocal, but there are no Canadian customs officials in American airports, Garneau said, although that doesn’t mean there couldn’t be in the future under the agreement signed last year.

Customs preclearance was a key element of the Beyond The Border Action Plan announced in 2011 by President Barack Obama and then prime minister Stephen Harper.

1. Another Liberal pledge gets trimmed back

Wayne Cuddington/Postmedia Newsublic service union leaders have told Treasury Board President Scott Brison that they want the government to immediately repeal Bill C-4, Conservative legislation that changed the rules for collective bargaining.

The CBC reports the Liberals have backtracked significantly on their pledge to reform Access to Information rulesto make it easier for Canadians to track government activities. Before taking office, Justin Trudeau promised to end fees for processing information requests; empower the information commissioner to order documents released and subject ministers to the act. But Trudeau’s mandate letter to Treasury Board President Scott Brison abandons some commitments and weakens other. The promise to cut fees is gone, ministers will only be held to “appropriate” requests and the other pledges are now subject to a “review” to be started sometime next year.

2. Trudeau and McCallum differ on refugee slowdown

Trudeau says the Paris attacks are a big reason the Liberals are going slower on accepting refugees. But immigration minister John McCallum told reporters the attacks had no impact on the government’s decision, and it changed the plan because of logistics and a determination to do things the right way.

3. Denis Coderre knows how to spend big

According to the sweet deal Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre gave to Michel Dorais — $110,000 for three months work coordinating refugees — Immigration Minister John McCallum should be making $9,000 a week (plus overtime for weekends and evenings), or $468,000 a year. And Dorais only has to worry about a few thousand Syrian refugees, most of them privately sponsored, while McCallum has to figure out how to meet the Liberal commitment of 25,000 refugees over the entire country. Must be nice having associates like Coderre.

4. World’s biggest emissions-spewing climate summit

Laurent Cipriani/Associated PressPolicemen fight with activists during a protest ahead of the 2015 Paris Climate Conference at the place de la Republique, in Paris, Sunday, Nov. 29, 2015.

Leaders from 200 countries and tens of thousands of delegates filling Lord know how many planes, trains and other emissions-spewing transport descend on Paris today to agree on a pact that won’t be binding, won’t even come close to meeting the minimum scientific standards and won’t halt the growth of greenhouse gas emissions. The earth won’t be saved. So what’s the big deal? Why the celebrating? Shouldn’t real climate activists be denouncing the waste of time and energy rather than saluting themselves on their achievement?

5. Golf furor pits Chinese against British club members

(AP Photo/Andy Wong, File) British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond.

A row with the new Chinese owners of one of Britain’s most prestigious golf clubs has escalated to the point that Britain’s foreign secretary has pledged to get personally involved. Philip Hammond promised members of the Wentworth Club he’d seek a meeting with the new owners to raise their grievances, and make it clear they “may wish to bear in mind the need to engage and to maintain good relations with the local community if they wish to seek planning permissions in the future”. Chinese owners bought the course, which is headquarters of the European tour and hosts an important annual tournament, for $270 million. They subsequently revealed a plan to slash membership from 4,000 to 800, sharply increase annual fees and charge current members $200,000 if they want to remain. The crisis bubbled over when members complained the club flag had been lowered in respect of the Paris terrorist attacks, but a Chinese flag had remained at full staff.

6. EU to pay Turks to keep refugees away

ARIS MESSINIS/AFP/Getty Images Refugees and migrants arrive at Lesbos island after crossing the Aegean sea from Turkey on October 23, 2015.

Under a deal struck Sunday, the EU will pay Turkey 3 billion euros, or about $4.2 billion, to prevent Syrian refugees trying to flee to Greece. The idea is to make conditions more livable, so more refugees will stay put. The obvious danger is that they stay put forever, creating the kind of permanent homeless colonies that house Palestinians in Jordan and Lebanon. It’s also not clear how long the funding will go on — Turkey wanted 3 billion every year, the EU agreed only to more money as needed. But it buys time for the EU to sort out the flood of people now demanding help, while trying to end the chaos in Syria that’s causing it all. Good luck with that.

7. Lifestyles of Toronto’s waterfront Liberals

Sean Kilpatrick / Canadian PressMinister of Transport Marc Garneau

Marc Garneau may have a point about Toronto’s waterfront airport –“sometimes issues are quality of life issues and those are important” — but lifestyle doesn’t end at the waterfront. The Liberals moved precipitately and arbitrarily on quashing the airport plan. For every person with a condo on the water, there are thousands of others in nearby towers who might not mind skipping the long slog out to Pearson airport

Declaring a conflict of interest, mayor-elect John Tory has stepped clear of the contentious debate over expanding the island airport.

In the sweeping declaration Friday, Mr. Tory also resigned from the board of directors of Metro Inc., and Rogers Communications, but refused to break a deathbed promise to act as a trustee of various Roger family trusts.

Mr. Tory said he will not participate in city council discussions about permitting jets at Billy Bishop airport because his eldest son, John, is the chief executive officer of a Thunder Bay airline, Private Air Inc., which has a regional office at the island airport.

“I cannot in good conscience interfere with my son’s ability to earn an income and support his family because of my decision to seek public office,” Mr. Tory said.

He also will recuse himself from any city discussions about home renovation company Stratheden Homes Ltd., of which his wife, Barbara Hackett, is the president and he is a director and investor.

He said he would remain as trustee and director of Rogers family-related trusts and a member of the advisory committee of the Rogers Control Trust, pledging to declare a conflict during any city discussion involving a Rogers-controlled company.

“Before his death, I gave my word to Ted Rogers that I would act in this capacity so long as I was able, and out of a sense of moral obligation to my late friend, I do not intend to resign from these positions.”

Mr. Tory said he consulted three lawyers and met with the city’s integrity commissioner. On their advice, he is not declaring a conflict over his personal and family investments in publicly traded companies.

NotJetsTO welcomed Mr. Tory’s declaration, but questioned the “potential meddling” of one of his staffers who once lobbied for the island airport.

“Vic Gupta was a key lobbyist for the island airport expansion and now he is Tory’s principal secretary,” NoJetsTO acting chairman Norman Di Pasquale said. “The people of Toronto need guarantees that Gupta will not continue to lobby on the waterfront jet issue.”

A group of private investors, television personalities and celebrity chefs have rallied to save the historic Terminal A building at Billy Bishop Airport.

The 75-year-old building’s fate had been in doubt since the Toronto Port Authority decommissioned it in 2010 when the new terminal opened.

“When it became clear that it had come to the end of its life I was quite concerned about what might happen to it,” said Toronto businessman Alexander Younger, who is representing the private investors involved in the re-opening. “That building has a lot of important heritage for the city of Toronto.”

Built in 1939, the Terminal A building is one of the oldest airport terminals in Canada and one of the few of its kind left in the world. The federal government designated it a national historic building in 1989.

“We want to recreate that charming feel of the building when it was built in the 1930s,” he said, adding that it will be preserved as a historic building. “We really want to celebrate the heritage of both the islands and also the airport.”

Handout/Toronto Post AuthorityAn archival photo of the historic Terminal A building at Toronto's Billy Bishop airport.

Mr. Younger and other investors will be working with designers and television personalities Sarah Richardson and Tommy Smythe, celebrity chef and restaurateur Lynn Crawford and Ruby Watchco Executive Chef Lora Kirk to redesign the space.

The restyled building will feature a restaurant, event space, aviation museum and area for private pilots.

“It was just a matter of finding a solution that worked for everybody,” said Deborah Wilson, spokeswoman with the Toronto Port Authority. “We’re very grateful that Alexander Younger and the private investors came forward with a vision for this building.

“We didn’t want to see it torn down,” she said, adding that no public funds will be used to restore and redesign the building.

The Terminal A building is expected to reopen by spring 2016 but there is still “a lot of work to be done,” said Ms. Wilson.

Handout/Toronto Post AuthorityAn archival photo of the historic Terminal A building at Toronto's Billy Bishop airport.

The two-storey, 766 square metre building first needs to be moved about 230 metres southeast of the current location, where it will be accessible by the Hanlan’s Point Ferry. From there, the designers, investors and chefs will work to redesign the space.

Ms. Wilson said renovations will allow the building to retain its architectural integrity and its important place in Toronto’s history.

“Certainly for many years that was the place you came in. Anyone coming in on the Island Airport, that was their first introduction to Toronto,” she said.

Terminal A even appeared in the 1990 Hollywood film Tommy Boy featuring Chris Farley and David Spade. The building was passed off as Ohio’s Sandusky Municipal Airport in the film.

“The restored terminal is a great addition to the Billy Bishop Airport,” said Toronto Deputy Mayor Norm Kelly. “The terminal building is an important part of Canada’s aviation legacy and a vital piece of Toronto’s heritage. We are very pleased that the building is being restored and transformed into a public space that everyone can enjoy.”

Handout/Toronto Post AuthorityAn archival photo of the historic Terminal A building at Toronto's Billy Bishop airport.

Mr. Younger himself has a 30-year personal connection to the airport. He earned his pilot’s license at 16 and has fond memories of visiting air traffic controllers at the terminal building.

“It was neat to see how that whole place worked from an air perspective,” he said.

He hopes the redesigned building, along with the restaurant, which he says will offer healthy, local options and will “not be fancy,” will become a destination for Torontonians and tourists alike.

“Folks that just generally want to go and have a great meal and have one of the best views of the city can go out and enjoy it,” he said.

Workers are done digging a 200-metre tunnel from the foot of Bathurst Street to the Billy Bishop City Centre Airport, 30 metres below Lake Ontario. Now it is time for the lawyers to go to work.

Last Monday the Toronto Port Authority announced that the concrete liner was complete for the airport tunnel. Then on Wednesday Technicore Underground Inc., the company that did the tunneling, slapped PCL Constructors Canada Inc., the general contractor on the tunnel job, with a $12-million lawsuit.

Technicore agreed to work with PCL on the job in 2010, and committed to complete the job in August of 2013. But workers hit steel walls that had been left over from an aborted tunneling job back in 1935, which slowed progress on the tunnel.

Technicore focuses the bulk of its legal claim, filed in the Superior Court of Justice in Toronto, on allegations that PCL promised it would obtain from the City of Toronto noise bylaw exemptions so that Technicore’s workers could work on the job for two shifts, or 20 hours a day.

In July of 2012, however, the City of Toronto rejected the application for a noise bylaw exemption.

“PCL took the position that Technicore was still obligated to provide 20 hours of mining a day,” the suit claims. Technicore instead did one shift and one half shift per day, incurring lots of overtime costs for its workers, says the claim. Once the work moved entirely underground, Technicore staff did work 24 hours a day. PCL finally got a noise bylaw exemption in March of 2013, the suit says.

In believing that PCL would obtain the exemption, “Technicore relied on PCL’s representations to its detriment, which were false,” the suit alleges. None of the claims in the suit have been proven in court.

The Toronto Port Authority commissioned the $82-million tunnel, which will be paid for, the authority says, ” by passengers who use the service, through the Airport Improvement Fee of $20 included in their flight cost.”

On Monday the TPA referred questions on the lawsuit to PCL.

Shane Jones, a spokesman at PCL’s headquarters in Edmonton, said the company has no comment because the case is before the courts.

In digging the tunnel, Technicore also ran into problems with steel walls left in the ground after workers began an earlier tunnel to the airport in 1935. Technicore told the National Post in early April that in 2012 when the TPA awarded the contract to dig the new tunnel, it did not disclose the earlier tunnel.

Two weeks after the Post story appeared, the TPA posted on its web site a detailed description of the 1935 job.

“Geotechnical plans and documents of public record had indicated that there were tunnel remnants underground but no one knew for sure what the pilings looked like,” the TPA wrote in a story it titled, “Digging up history.”

“In August 2012, shortly after construction began, history met the modern day when certain steel pilings were found at the end of a tunneling drill bit. The drill bit needed to be replaced, but the pilings were soon removed and construction soon resumed.”

While the liner is complete, there is still plenty of work to be done before the tunnel will be in use by the public. The port authority plans to open the tunnel next winter.

Is Toronto allergic to progress? Will the “discussions” and “considerations” ever end. Chris Selley, Matt Gurney and NOW’s Jonathan Goldsbie talk Toronto’s ambitions, as represented by an airport.

Selley: Recently an excitable Toronto Star columnist argued that the Island Airport was shaping up as a red-hot issue in the mayoral campaign. It sounded daft. Choosing a mayor because of his moral stance on jets vs. turboprop engines? But then, not so long ago we chose a mayor in large part because he wanted not to build a 150-metre bridge to said airport. Why not do it again?

Thankfully, I suspect City Council has given us an answer to that: Because there’s now a pretty clear framework in place for what Porter Airlines has to do to land its jets, one nearly everyone agrees with, there is no need to tear our hair out about it. Furthermore, at a recent meeting with the National Post editorial board, Porter CEO Bob Deluce was quite clear: If the planes break existing noise requirements, if the longer runway would impinge upon space for boating, the deal’s off. I’m perfectly comfortable holding him to that and worrying about things that matter more. What say you, gentlemen?

Gurney: Likewise. Mr. Deluce’s position is reasonable, and surprisingly clear: If the plan doesn’t meet the stringent requirements set out, it’s off. The whole affair, though, brings to mind Toronto’s weirdly split nature. We’re so desperate to be a world-class city … until we actually start to grow and change and evolve, and then it’s panic in the streets. If we could mulligan the airport, yeah, maybe we wouldn’t put it on the Island. But it’s there now, it provides a valued service (Porter’s success is proof of that) and it wants to provide an improved service while still operating within established noise parameters. And yet there is fierce opposition to this. It’s astonishing, but also somehow oh-so typically Toronto. A colleague from Calgary recently poked fun of me, pointing out I come from a city where people fought tooth and nail against a big-box book store opening a decade or so ago, and then were more recently outraged when said bookstore closed. He held that up as “so Toronto.” The constant outrage about the airport is another example of that same dreary impulse.

Goldsbie: I would argue that it’s somewhat naive to take Deluce at his word, given both his older statements about whether his ambitions would eventually encompass jets and his more recent statements concerning the necessity of Council coming to an urgent decision (before they could acquire answers to the many open questions). Further to that, jet plane noise and the size of the marine exclusion zone are hardly the only concerns that have been raised about the proposal. We still don’t know how the mainland at the foot of Bathurst would have to be reconfigured to accommodate significantly larger passenger volumes or who would pay for such things. It may be fair to characterize constant fretting as a part of our city’s personality — but another thing that’s “oh-so-typically Toronto” is this determination to bend to the will of a particular business without considering what obligation that business or our policymakers have to the development of the city as a whole.

Selley: If there’s one thing we’re not short of in this city, it’s consideration. Competent consideration is less of a guarantee, I suppose, but councillors claim to have this under control and we’ll hold them to their words just as we do Deluce. The infrastructure concerns are real, and passengers should certainly foot the bill for fixes just like they do at other airports. But that’s about capacity, not jets per se. The fact that politicians who oppose the airport’s very existence pretend otherwise is definitely, as Matt implies, Toronto in a nutshell.

Gurney: The infrastructure issues around Bathurst are indeed real. I’ve only had the pleasure — I use that term loosely — of being in that area once at peak hours. Best avoided if possible, believe me. But we have to remember that this is a city where infrastructure is terrible everywhere. Anyone who does not fly out of the island airport, but needs to get in or out by air, will probably need to use Pearson. And that will mean fighting their way through our unbelievably congested roads, or maybe one day using the much discussed, much delayed express train to the airport. Which was something else we fought for tooth and nail through never-ending battles about exactly how the train should operate and where it should run and how often it should stop, even though everyone agreed we needed it. I give you Toronto, ladies and germs.

Goldsbie: To your last sentence, Chris, I don’t understand why a person can’t be both opposed to the airport in principle and to this expansion scheme in particular. I know I’d rather the airport be parkland like the rest of the Island, but that doesn’t mean I believe that will happen in my lifetime or that the current situation is unbearable. The way Porter dismisses its critics as people who want to shut down the airport is akin to the way Marineland dismisses its critics as people who want to close all zoos. The assertion may be true to an extent, but it misses the point: There are specific concerns being raised that are independent of anyone’s ideal end goal. Framing it as an allergy to progress is a disingenuous way to approach legitimate disagreements about what constitutes the best interests of Toronto.

A year’s delay in completing an $82.5-million tunnel to Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport stems from contaminated soil, failure to win concessions under city noise rules and excavation equipment that slammed into remnants of an old tunnel begun in 1935, the National Post has learned.

Add to that a $10.2-million lien against the project, registered by Technicore Underground of Newmarket, the company doing the excavating, over alleged unpaid work.

The tunnel project — a partnership involving the federal Toronto Port Authority and a private consortium — first broke ground in November 2012, with a targeted completion date of early 2014. Last week, the port authority pushed back the opening date by a year, to “winter 2014-2015,” and blamed delays on ice building up in the two main shafts that lead down to the future pedestrian tunnel.

Related

But according to a source familiar with the project, the ice is a minor inconvenience compared with other troubles on the job.

When workers began digging, they hoped for an exemption under the city’s noise bylaw, to allow them to work 24 hours a day. But after friction between the port authority and Councillor Adam Vaughan, the city turned down the exemption request.

The record of that antipathy is clear for anyone to read on the port authority website; in one blistering letter in March of 2012, Mark McQueen, chair of the port authority, accuses Mr. Vaughan of speaking “nonsense” and of “erroneous” statements.

In March of 2013, the city granted a partial noise exemption until 11 p.m. to complete the tunnelling job. Mr. Vaughan was not immediately available to comment.

Other delays can be traced back almost 80 years.

In 1935, the federal government began a tunnel to the island at the foot of Bathurst Street. Sam McBride, Toronto’s then-mayor, opposed the effort. Two months into the dig, William Lyon Mackenzie King, a Liberal, defeated Conservative R.B. Bennett and became prime minister. King cancelled the $1-million tunnel project, but remnants of the effort remain.

When digging the current tunnel, workers slammed into stretches of interlocking sheet metal piling driven into the ground back in 1935.

The contractor inquired and learned that the port authority had drawings of the 1935 tunnel in its archives, the source said.

The 80-year-old work weakened the rock at the site, according to the source.

“The 1935 work made the rock more porous.” When crews plugged leaks, “the south wall started to move.” Crews then had to put in more shoring to keep out the water, the source said.

Mr. Lundy said surprises come with the territory on this type of job.

“We gave the contractor a geotechnical baseline report,” he said. “We had a room full of documents. We gave the contractor information on what to dig and what to expect. Digging around in the waterfront of Toronto, there’s all sorts of surprises. We had some contaminated soil on the property, and it went to Greensoils [a soil remediation company in the Port Lands]. If there are things that are found that are not identified, then that is the responsibility of the authority.”

Even that contaminated soil caused delays, according to the source.

Before discovering that the soil from the site was contaminated, trucks hauled many truckloads to a facility in Newmarket. Testing revealed the contamination, and the trucks then hauled the dirt back to Greensoils.

As for the lien, Mr. Lundy said, “They’ve taken care of that. It’s released from title.”

While the payments have resumed, it is expected the financial dispute will be dealt with at a later time.

Deborah Wilson, a spokeswoman for the port authority, later followed up with a written statement.

“The management of the project with regard to timelines and trades is PCL’s [PCL is the overall construction manager]. Despite issues between PCL and Technicore, work has continued throughout and Technicore has been onsite without interruption.”

Jennifer Nelson, a spokesperson for PCL, replied to telephone calls with a written statement, which read, in part, “Excavation of the tunnel and tunnel shafts adjacent the Western Gap dock walls proved to be more difficult and time-consuming than anticipated. Those delays have been further compounded by the recent severe winter weather.”

Forum Equity Partner, which is organizing the financing of the project, also sent a statement: “Forum, PCL and the TPA are working collaboratively to manage the project in accordance with the project agreements. The project did experience delays due to unanticipated difficulties with excavation works and due to severe winter weather conditions.”

For the port authority, completion of the tunnel to the busy airport cannot come soon enough. “Obviously we are disappointed that the tunnel will not open this fall as hoped,” Ms. Wilson writes in an email, “because this is a pivotal piece of our traffic management strategy and we are keen to identify solutions to traffic at Eireann Quay.”

Toronto city staff want to put off the contentious debate on jets at the island airport until the next term of council, but there is a movement afoot, among those who want the prohibition to stand, to vote on the issue next month.

The deputy city manager is asking for the authority to negotiate a phased airport growth plan that caps the number of passengers, peak hour flights and daily flights. Staff want a list of requirements met before reporting back on Porter Airlines’ request to lift the jet ban at Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport and extend the runway. That debate would not happen until next year.

Councillor Pam McConnell says there is another option, which she expects to come to the floor of council in April.

Related

“You can say no to jets and you can still address the issue of capping, the issue of slots, the issue of the environment,” said Ms. McConnell, who maintains expansion would ruin the waterfront.

There are no limits on passenger traffic at the island airport, estimated at about 2.3 million a year. Staff propose phasing in a cap of 2.7 million annual passengers. They also want to cap peak hour flights at 20 (up from 16) and daily flights at the existing 202.

John Livey, the deputy city manager, says his “road map” would match growth at the airport with transportation and community improvements in the area. It could lead to a recommendation in favour of Porter’s request, he added. If approved, jets could be at the airport by 2017 or 2018.

Porter president Robert Deluce called the staff recommendations a “solid step forward” but deemed the proposed flight and passenger caps stringent. “We support caps in principle, but believe they require further discussion,” he said.

The group No Jets TO said the road map is a “slippery slope” and expressed disappointment it did not highlight issues about health, safety and the environment.

]]>http://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/toronto-city-staff-want-to-put-off-contentious-porter-island-airport-jets-debate-amid-push-to-vote-next-month/feed2stdThe deputy city manager is asking for the authority to negotiate a phased airport growth plan that caps the number of passengers, peak hour flights and daily flights. Staff want a list of requirements met before reporting back on Porter Airlines' request to lift the jet ban at Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport and extend the runwayPorter now wants even longer Toronto island airport runway as airline calls for 400 metre extensionhttp://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/porter-airlines-says-island-airport-runway-needs-to-be-extended-64-additional-metres-into-lake-ontario
http://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/porter-airlines-says-island-airport-runway-needs-to-be-extended-64-additional-metres-into-lake-ontario#commentsWed, 04 Sep 2013 01:46:41 +0000http://news.nationalpost.com/?p=359257

TORONTO — A contentious plan to land jets at the Toronto island airport got more complicated Tuesday, with Porter Airlines saying a jet-friendly runway may need to be 64 metres longer than anticipated.

Although the initial plan was to extend the runway by 168 metres on both sides, it may need to be extended into Lake Ontario by a total of 400 metres, the Toronto-based airline said Tuesday.

In a statement, Porter Airlines assured Lake Ontario boaters that the extra runway would “not change the enjoyment of Lake Ontario by Torontonians.”

Related

“The buoy that boats navigate around when passing through the Western Gap does not move, so there is no material change to access,” said Porter Airlines president Robert Deluce in the statement.

In fact, it would enhance navigation by “providing a breakwater for wave protection and reducing sediment build-up in the area,” it reads.

NoJetsTO, a prominent opponent of the plan, called the announcement “another bombshell in [Porter Airlines’] quest to ruin the waterfront with jet aircraft” and said the expansion would turn “even more of Lake Ontario into tarmac.”

In April, Porter Airlines announced its plan to outfit Billy Bishop Airport for jet aircraft, arguing that the downtown terminal could offer flights to Florida, Vancouver and Los Angeles by as early as 2016.

National Post staffPorter Airlines is requesting to expand runways and fly jets at Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport.

In anticipation of the new facilities, Porter has placed a conditional $2.29-billion order with Bombardier for as many as 30 CS100 aircraft.

In its promotional materials, the airline has stressed the claim that the planes are the “quietest commercial jets in production.”

The longer runway would only make them quieter, according to the company, since they would use less power on take-off. Still, the airline clarified that the original 168 meter proposal is still being given equal consideration.

But the proposal has a big hurdle: Porter Airlines is still working to overturn a 30-year-old tripartite agreement between the City of Toronto, the Toronto Port Authority and the federal government.

]]>http://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/porter-airlines-says-island-airport-runway-needs-to-be-extended-64-additional-metres-into-lake-ontario/feed1stdAlthough the initial plan was to extend the runway by 168 metres on both sides, it will now need to be extended into Lake Ontario by a total of 400 metres, the Toronto-based Porter Airlines said TuesdayTO0905_proter_airport_runway_extension_C_AB[1]National Post staffToronto council gears up for battle over Porter proposal to lift jet ban, expand runway at island airporthttp://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/toronto-council-gears-up-for-battle-over-proposal-to-lift-jet-ban-at-island-airport
http://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/toronto-council-gears-up-for-battle-over-proposal-to-lift-jet-ban-at-island-airport#commentsWed, 10 Apr 2013 19:10:34 +0000http://news.nationalpost.com/?p=290862

CLICK TO ENLARGE

Just hours after Porter Airlines announced it wants to start flying jets into Toronto’s island airport by 2016, the battle lines at city hall had already been drawn.

On one side are members of Mayor Ford’s administration who support Porter Airlines in its $2.29-billion plan to purchase as many as 30 Bombardier CSeries planes that would allow the carrier to fly to more far-flung destinations, such as Calgary and California.

On the other side are those who vehemently object to jets and the runway extension that would need to be built to accommodate them.

To alter the runway — adding 168 metres on each end — the city, the federal government and the Toronto Port Authority would need to revisit a tripartite agreement that currently bans jet aircraft on the island. In a statement, the port authority said it will not consider any changes until after city council deals with the matter.

Mayor Rob Ford, who took his trade mission to Chicago on Porter last year, was asked about the issue on Tuesday before the announcement and said he supports the airline and would look at its request.

Michael Thompson, chair of the city’s economic development committee, threw his “strong support” behind the proposal, while Councillor Doug Ford heralded the jobs it would create and the tourism it could bring.

Still, Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong, another Ford ally, suggested it would be a tough sell at city council.

Councillor Shelley Carroll agreed. “If I were the mayor I’d be feeling a little bit set-up at this point. This is going to be a big issue.”

She was one of several councillors who voiced opposition to the plans.

Fiscal conservative and midtown councillor Karen Stintz said public opinion has turned on the airport since the battle over the bridge in 2003. Former mayor David Miller ran on a promise to kill a previously approved fixed link to the airport and delivered a city council vote soon after he took office. On Wednesday, he took the rare step of weighing in on a municipal issue by writing on Huffington Post Canada “The Island is for People, Not More Porter Jets.”

“I think people value it now as an asset,” said Ms. Stintz, who supports both the airport and Porter. “I think it’s a great service that serves the business community well,” she said. But adding jets changes the discussion dramatically for her.

“My own personal feeling is we don’t need jets landing in the downtown, and I think that feeling would be shared.”

Down at the waterfront Wednesday, where heavy equipment toiled on a pedestrian tunnel and cabbies waited for fares, locals who have been living next to the little airport expressed the gamut of opinion.

“I don’t want it,” Teresa Ascencao, a media artist and university teacher, said flatly. “I just feel like we’ve wrecked our city front as it is, and expanding it is going to make it even worse. We can no longer go here and hear the quiet of nature.”

Her partner Johann Louw, a student at Seneca College, had similar concerns. “Where do you balance corporate interests with the individuals living around the area?”

Darren Calabrese/National PostRobert Deluce, CEO of Porter Airlines

Others said the noise has not really intruded on their lives.

“I’m not really opposed. I think things are going to change and you have to roll with whatever is going on,” said Mike Willigan, as he walked his young son to the park. “It’s part of a growing city,” said Sacha Delso, walking his pug. “Obviously it depends on the size of the jets. I’d hate to have a 747, which obviously wouldn’t be landing here.”

Councillor Adam Vaughan, who represents the downtown ward of Trinity-Spadina, posited Porter’s request as the thin edge of the wedge. He argued that allowing the company to fly so called “whisper jets” that are said to be roughly as quiet as their current planes would open the gates for others to land different planes.

“And those jets aren’t quiet, they aren’t clean and they will pollute the water,” he said.

Councillor Ford maintained it’s the right move for the city because it will make travelling convenient and generate more economic activity.

“If we didn’t have Bob Deluce [president of Porter], there’d be a cornfield out at the airport right now,” said Councillor Ford. “We’re one of the only cities, that I’m aware of, in North America that you can work, you can live, and you can walk to the airport.”

Other councillors reserved judgment. Councillor Frank Di Giorgio, the budget chief, said his gut reaction is to say no to jets, but he would have to examine the proposal. Similarly, Councillor Mark Grimes wants to take a closer look.

“Jets fire everybody up,” he acknowledged. “I know from being in the [Greater Toronto Airports Authority] the industry is now looking at quieter planes, more fuel efficient and how they come in.”

Josh Colle, who used to work for the GTAA before becoming a councillor, said the best spot for a Porter expansion might be Pearson.

Councillor Carroll accused Porter of being disingenuous with its intentions, noting when councillors asked questions about the pedestrian tunnel or a larger terminal, they were told it wasn’t about expansion.

“I’m not a crazy person that stands there in a floppy hat taking pictures of people who fly Porter. I fly Porter,” she said. But, “that airport was never meant to be a long-haul airport.”

National Post

]]>http://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/toronto-council-gears-up-for-battle-over-proposal-to-lift-jet-ban-at-island-airport/feed8stdRobert Deluce, president and chief executive officer of Porter Airlines Inc., second right, speaks to members of the media in a model cabin of the Bombardier CS100 plane during a press conference Wednesday.CLICK TO ENLARGEDarren Calabrese/National PostNorm Betts/BloombergToronto breaks ground on Island airport pedestrian tunnel with Stephen Harper, Jim Flaherty in attendancehttp://news.nationalpost.com/posted-toronto/toronto-breaks-ground-on-island-airport-pedestrian-tunnel-with-stephen-harper-jim-flaherty-in-attendance
http://news.nationalpost.com/posted-toronto/toronto-breaks-ground-on-island-airport-pedestrian-tunnel-with-stephen-harper-jim-flaherty-in-attendance#commentsFri, 09 Mar 2012 17:18:48 +0000http://news.nationalpost.com/?p=149766

Construction started today on a pedestrian tunnel to link the island airport with the downtown core, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced this morning.

“This is an eminently sensible idea,” Mr. Harper said. “This is a world-class city and world-class cities must provide world-class service.”

Mr. Harper was joined by Jim Flaherty, Minister of Finance; Rob Ford, Mayor of Toronto; and Mark McQueen, chairman of the Toronto Port Authority (TPA).

The $82.5-million, 800-foot underwater tunnel will connect Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport with the foot of Bathurst Street, known as Eirann Quay.

It will also allow new water and sewer mains thanks to a city council decision last July. This should save the city over $10-million and the TPA $2.5 to $3.5-million, Mr. Ford said.

The federal government recently approved the necessary regulatory amendments to allow the project to move ahead. The tunnel is scheduled to open in spring 2014 and will be funded primarily through the Airport Improvement Fee, according to the TPA. The fee is currently $20 for each plane passenger.

“It will not cost the taxpayers a dime,” Mr. Harper said.

The TPA has an agreement with a private group, Forum Infrastructure Partners, to design, build, finance and maintain the tunnel.

The airport served more than 1.5 million passengers in 2011, and anticipates 2 million this year.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty and Mayor Rob Ford are planning to gather at Billy Bishop Airport Friday, where they are expected to herald construction of a $60-million pedestrian tunnel to the island.

Mr. Harper is scheduled to make an announcement at the 11 a.m. press event. Speculation in a variety of media reports Thursday was that the announcement may involve federal funding for the project.

Mark McQueen, chairman of the Toronto Port Authority, will also be in attendance.

Last July, city council approved a deal with the Toronto Port Authority for the tunnel that gives the port authority access to city land to build the underwater passage and will save the city about $10-million by allowing it to put new water and sewer infrastructure in the same tunnel.

At the time, both the city and the port authority touted their “collaborative” efforts — a far cry from the battles that have raged in the past over a fixed link across the water.

City council under then mayor David Miller voted to kill a plan to construct a bridge to the island in 2003. In 2010, the port authority revived a plan to build a pedestrian tunnel.

Toronto city council approved a deal with the Toronto Port Authority for a proposed pedestrian tunnel to the island airport.

The agreement gives the port authority access to city land to build the underwater passage and will save the city about $10-million by allowing it to put new water and sewer infrastructure in the same tunnel.

The tunnel will cost about $60-million. The new route under the Western Channel will save about $2.5-million.

Both the city and the port authority touted their “collaborative” efforts — a far cry from the battles that have raged in the past over a fixed link across the water.

City council under then mayor David Miller voted to kill a plan to construct a bridge to the island in 2003. In 2010, the port authority revived a plan to build a pedestrian tunnel, financing it with a public-private partnership, and paying back the cost with fees collected from airline passengers destined for Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport on the island.

Geoff Wilson, chief executive of the port authority, called it a “win win” for both sides. He expects construction to start in 2012 and take about two years.

“We’re expecting to move forward with this; it’s something that is very important for the airport and I think very important for the city.”

Local councillors Adam Vaughan and Pam McConnell raised objections from residents they represent along the waterfront, who don’t want aircraft flying overhead.

Councillor Vaughan said there are still unresolved taxi traffic issues. The city has leased part of the Canada Malting Lands for construction staging and taxi use, and is finalizing a deal that will provide additional taxi staging at 450 Lake Shore Ave. West.

“The neighbourhood is never going to be comfortable with the airport operating down there. The smell, the noise, the curfew violations, the traffic violations are all things the neighbourhood is profoundly uncomfortable with,” he said. “That being said, if the port authority and the city can work together to save the city money … the neighbourhood has learned to live with that as a legitimate option.”

Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong, a member of Mayor Rob Ford’s executive, was happy about the deal. “We couldn’t get a bridge so we’re getting the next best thing, we’re getting a tunnel,” he said following the 24 to 13 vote in its favour.

]]>http://news.nationalpost.com/posted-toronto/city-approves-deal-for-tunnel-to-island-airport/feed1stdThe City of Toronto has authorized the construction of a pedestrian tunnel to link the Billy Bishop Airport on the Toronto Island to the mainland. The airport is currently accessed by ferry.Update: Strong winds lead to hydro outages, school closureshttp://news.nationalpost.com/posted-toronto/powerful-gusts-lead-to-hydro-outages-school-closures
http://news.nationalpost.com/posted-toronto/powerful-gusts-lead-to-hydro-outages-school-closures#commentsThu, 28 Apr 2011 15:44:40 +0000http://news.nationalpost.com/?p=61084

The winds have also caused some flight delays at the Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport, according to representatives from WestJet and Porter Airlines.

Highway closures

The OPP have reported that Highway 405 at the Lewiston-Queenston Bridge, Niagara-on-the-Lake is closed due to high winds.

According to a road advisory release issued by the Niagara detachment, all lanes are closed in both directions.

The QEW Toronto bound lanes are also closed at this time, from Victoria Street, after a tractor trailer flipped onto its side Thursday morning.

According to the OPP, there is a tow currently on site to remove the vehicle, but in the meantime traffic remains detoured.

The estimated length of the road advisory is currently unknown at this time.

School power outages

The powerful gusts have left 20 to 30 schools in the Toronto area without power. In response to the weather, the Toronto District School Board has issued a weather alert on their website warning parents of the gusty conditions, said Lauren Riley, a communications co-ordinator with the school board.

At this point, she says only Whitney Public School in the Mount Pleasant area has had classes cancelled due to a water pump issue.

School officials are currently calling parents to come and pick their children up. Students whose parents cannot drop by will remain at the school with staff members.

“Any other school cancellations are going on a case-by-case basis,” Ms. Riley said. “We would normally only ever send the kids home if there was no heat or water, and because it’s a mild day the temperature shouldn’t be an issue.”

Ms. Riley says the school board has been receiving emails throughout the morning saying power has already been restored to at least five schools.

Hydro down across parts of the city

Toronto Hydro reports that more than 15 areas across the GTA are currently experiencing power outages as a result of the high gusts of wind. A representative from the company said that they’re dealing with emergency situations like uprooted trees and traffic accidents before starting to restore the hydro.

The strong gusts are also leading to serious water-related risks, says Srgt. Dave Harlock with the Toronto Police Marine Unit.

“I was just coming along the lake shore and the waves were so big that the remnants from them were hitting the cars going eastbound on the road,” Srgt. Harlock said. “If you’re walking along there and that wave catches you it could knock you off your feet and you could possibly fall in the water.”

Sgt. Harlock estimated that the waves were at least 10 feet in height and that the water could make the cement along the shore very slippery.

“People can hurt themselves or fall in, so you should definitely be staying away from the edge on a day like today,” he said.

There are also certain precautions that boat owners should take in weather like this.

“[Your boat] should be held down by at least three lines. You want a spring line set on it so it doesn’t move or break away from the dock. The boats will take a lot of abuse with the winds and the waves unless they’re tied tight, so it’s improtant for the boaters to make sure their lines are in good condition and tied properly,” he said.

In the end, Srgt. Harlock said the best thing to do is to stay away from the water and not go out in these conditions.

“It’s the worst I’ve seen it in 10 years,” he said.

Wet weather could lead to more damaging winds

The above-average amount of rainy weather in Toronto could contribute to more uprooted trees, said David Phillips, a senior climatologist with Environment Canada.

“We’ve had very wet conditions in Toronto in March and April. This means that the ground is soggy and saturated so the trees, telephone poles and anything anchored into the ground is much less held down now,” he said.

As a result of this, wind warnings like the one in effect today could be particularly damaging.

The one positive, Mr. Phillips said, is that the trees didn’t yet have leaves, which would have weighed them down even further.

For Environment Canada to declare a wind warning, winds must be gusting at around 90 km/h speeds, Mr. Phillips said.

In Toronto, the winds can be attributed to different temperatures across the area, Mr. Phillips said.

In situations like this, the warm air pushes forward, backed by the cold air. When the warm air and cold air meet, you get a combination of pressure that is capable of creating very strong gusts.

According to Mr. Phillips, there are two kinds of winds: the sustained, steady kind that can be felt at any moment outside, and wind gusts that can reach high speeds at any moment.

“We would issue a high wind warning if the sustained winds were at 60 km/h for three hours or more or if we were experiencing, in that period, wind gusts that would blow at 90 km/h or more. Most often the wind warnings are issued for the gust,” he said.

Mr. Phillips added that the winds in Toronto are significantly high.

“The sustained winds we had at 11 o’clock at Pearson International Airport were coming in at 82 km/h, with gusts of 95 km/h. Clearly there would also be some areas where we don’t even measure winds that would be far above 100 km/h with each gust.”

Surrounding Toronto areas such as Niagara, Hamilton and Long Point are also experiencing extreme winds, and the Environment Canada warning stretches as far as Peterborough, he said.

Despite claims in a new draft environmental assessment that a tunnel to Toronto’s Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport won’t have any negative effect on the environment, a community group opposed to the project is lashing out, calling the report a “sham.”

The assessment, commissioned by the Toronto Port Authority and conducted by Dillon Consulting Ltd., says the creation of the proposed $45-million 130-metre tunnel from the bottom of Bathurst Street to the airport would not result in “significant adverse effects on the environment.”

But CommunityAIR, a vocal group of island and downtown residents opposed to the airport, takes issue with the assessment’s findings, saying there was not enough community consultation nor independent oversight.

“This is a study that was prepared by the TPA’s chosen consultants, reviewed by the TPA, and approved by the TPA,” said CommunityAIR chair Brian Iler in a statement. “There has been no arm’s length approval — by anyone. The whole process was a sham.”

CommunityAIR argues that the airport traffic is too high, creates noise pollution, and makes life generally miserable for those who live near the busy hub.

Mr. Iler said that a community meeting last March during which the TPA promised to engage local residents was largely a failure, as people wishing to participate had little or no information about the proposed tunnel.

Passengers using Porter Airlines, the only airline operating out of the island, must now take a 90-second ferry ride to reach the airport. Porter Airlines currently occupies 156 out of 202 flying slots available at the airport. That number is expected to rise as passenger traffic continues to increase.

Last November, the City Centre Terminal Corp. (owned by Porter Aviation Holdings Inc.) announced that it was accepting inquiries from commercial airlines seeking check-in counter and gate space at the terminal.

The draft environmental assessment states that the tunnel, built into the bedrock at the bottom of Lake Ontario, would improve access to the airport for passengers and services, such as fibre optic cables. The approximate depth of the tunnel would be 30 metres.

“Some minor, localized and short-term project construction related nuisance effects are expected. Very minor to no effects are expected for the operations period,” states the report. “The EA predicts that neither the direct effects nor the cumulative effects of the project would result in significant adverse effects on the environment.”

A ferry would continue to run for the purpose of transporting vehicles and goods to the island. The report estimates that construction, which could begin as early as next year, would take about 18 months.

The Toronto Port Authority says it will break ground in early 2011 on a $45-million pedestrian tunnel, linking the Western Gap ferry docks at the foot of Bathurst Street to the Billy Bishop Toronto City Centre Airport.

“[Building a tunnel] is a way to have a more consistent and reliable connectivity to move people to the airport,” Geoffrey Wilson, chief executive of the Port Authority, said on Tuesday.

Mr. Wilson cited increasing traffic to the airport as the impetus for the tunnel’s construction. Last year, approximately 770,000 people used the airport, compared with 25,000 users just five years ago. Mr. Wilson anticipates 1.2 million people will use the airport this year.

The Port Authority is conducting a “publicly involved” environment assessment to study the effects the tunnel would have on the operation of the airport and local surroundings, Mr. Wilson said. He expects the findings to be announced at the end of August.

Mr. Wilson said the Port Authority will forge a public-private partnership to build the tunnel. He said, “well over a half-dozen firms of repute” have expressed interest in investing in the project, without disclosing their names. The bidding process will take place in the first quarter of 2011, he said.

Much of the money used to pay for the tunnel will come from the airport’s $20-per-fare improvement fee, Mr. Wilson said.
Councillor Adam Vaughan, a vocal opponent of the airport’s expansion, said the tunnel is a “pipe dream” that will not increase traffic to the terminal.

“I don’t think the tunnel is a viable proposition, he said. “There are a number of unanswered questions”

He said public support for tunnel to the island is dwindling because Toronto residents and tourists will not be able to use the pathway to access island beaches, residences and attractions.

On July 9, the Toronto Port Authority released a study conducted by Ipsos Reid claiming 56% of Torontonians who were sampled supported the link, down six percentage points from 2009.

Mr. Vaughan also said the Port Authority is unaccountable, and the claim that the construction of the tunnel will use no public money is dubious at best. “[The Toronto Port Authority] is a rogue federal agency spending taxpayers’ money,” he said.

The councillor said he believes Porter Airlines’ future growth at the airport is in jeopardy.

Porter Airlines, which, up until next fall, is the airport’s only tenant airline, had aimed to put forward an initial public offering of its stock this year, but cancelled its plans in June citing “unfavourable market conditions.”